207
11 Salmon Aquaculture in Canada and Norway – Appraising Governability
Current Governing Systems and Policies
Aquaculture in general, and salmon aquaculture in particular, is managed and
governed by multi-layered authorities, including international, regional, national,
provincial (or state) and local departments and agencies. At the international level,
management and governance is led by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO). Article 9 of the FAO’s Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries presents a guideline for the development and management of aquaculture
(FAO 1995 ) . Regional organizations such as the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation
Organization (NASCO) and the European Union have also given speci fi c guidance
to salmon farming. For instance, NASCO signed the ‘Oslo Resolution’ agreement
in 1998 calling for “ the Parties to the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in
the North Atlantic Ocean to minimize impacts from salmon aquaculture on the wild
salmon stocks ” (Porter 2005 , 6). Through the involvement of the salmon aquaculture industry, the resolution has led to guidelines on the physical containment of
farmed operation and husbandry practices. The Oslo Resolution was later supplanted by the “Williamsburg Resolution” in 2003 (NASCO 2007 ) .
Canada is a good example of governing complexity at the national and provincial
levels. Salmon aquaculture is administered by a combination of federal, provincial
and local authorities. At the federal level, 17 departments and agencies share responsibilities for the regulation of the salmon aquaculture industry. The Department of
Fisheries and Oceans is the principal agency. Other important agencies include
Environment Canada, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Canadian Environmental
Assessment Agency and Health Canada. These departments and agencies oversee
the conservation and protection of wild fi sh stocks and fi sh habitats, international
trade, as well as general research and development, and address any issues beyond
provincial boundaries. Responsible governing institutions vary at the provincial
level. In British Columbia, for instance, three governmental agencies – namely, the
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, the Ministry of Environment, and the Integrated
Land Management Bureau - are directly involved in salmon aquaculture management. They are responsible for issuing licenses and permits, managing and regulating
operation facilities, training and education, and collecting production and fi nancial
data. The primary legislative instruments for aquaculture at a national level include
Fisheries Act Regulations (1973), Fisheries Act (1985, 1996), Aquaculture Regulation
(2002) and Environmental Management Act (2003). Based on these instruments,
speci fi c management strategies and policies are formulated and implemented.
Norway is another good example of how regulations and policies for marine
aquaculture have evolved over the years due to a variety of concerns. Salmon aquaculture is governed by the Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs, and primarily
administered by the Directorate of Fisheries. The Norwegian Food Safety Authority,
among others, is responsible for animal health, food safety and quality (Maroni
2000 ) . The Aquaculture Act is the major legislation, and has been modi fi ed with
emerging issues over time (Maroni 2000 ; Sønvisen 2003 ) . At the beginning, the
policy was to ensure regional development and secure local ownership through, for
11 Salmon Aquaculture in Canada and Norway – Appraising Governability
Current Governing Systems and Policies
Aquaculture in general, and salmon aquaculture in particular, is managed and
governed by multi-layered authorities, including international, regional, national,
provincial (or state) and local departments and agencies. At the international level,
management and governance is led by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO). Article 9 of the FAO’s Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries presents a guideline for the development and management of aquaculture
(FAO 1995 ) . Regional organizations such as the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation
Organization (NASCO) and the European Union have also given speci fi c guidance
to salmon farming. For instance, NASCO signed the ‘Oslo Resolution’ agreement
in 1998 calling for “ the Parties to the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in
the North Atlantic Ocean to minimize impacts from salmon aquaculture on the wild
salmon stocks ” (Porter 2005 , 6). Through the involvement of the salmon aquaculture industry, the resolution has led to guidelines on the physical containment of
farmed operation and husbandry practices. The Oslo Resolution was later supplanted by the “Williamsburg Resolution” in 2003 (NASCO 2007 ) .
Canada is a good example of governing complexity at the national and provincial
levels. Salmon aquaculture is administered by a combination of federal, provincial
and local authorities. At the federal level, 17 departments and agencies share responsibilities for the regulation of the salmon aquaculture industry. The Department of
Fisheries and Oceans is the principal agency. Other important agencies include
Environment Canada, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Canadian Environmental
Assessment Agency and Health Canada. These departments and agencies oversee
the conservation and protection of wild fi sh stocks and fi sh habitats, international
trade, as well as general research and development, and address any issues beyond
provincial boundaries. Responsible governing institutions vary at the provincial
level. In British Columbia, for instance, three governmental agencies – namely, the
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, the Ministry of Environment, and the Integrated
Land Management Bureau - are directly involved in salmon aquaculture management. They are responsible for issuing licenses and permits, managing and regulating
operation facilities, training and education, and collecting production and fi nancial
data. The primary legislative instruments for aquaculture at a national level include
Fisheries Act Regulations (1973), Fisheries Act (1985, 1996), Aquaculture Regulation
(2002) and Environmental Management Act (2003). Based on these instruments,
speci fi c management strategies and policies are formulated and implemented.
Norway is another good example of how regulations and policies for marine
aquaculture have evolved over the years due to a variety of concerns. Salmon aquaculture is governed by the Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs, and primarily
administered by the Directorate of Fisheries. The Norwegian Food Safety Authority,
among others, is responsible for animal health, food safety and quality (Maroni
2000 ) . The Aquaculture Act is the major legislation, and has been modi fi ed with
emerging issues over time (Maroni 2000 ; Sønvisen 2003 ) . At the beginning, the
policy was to ensure regional development and secure local ownership through, for